Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
, here our president is addressing concerns in their lives. i agree the big topics like the eu trade pac that is very important. but i don't think people in the country are listening for that. they are listening for all the little programs that the rest of you ridicule, and he is telegraphing he gets what their problems are and he is on their side. that is very important politically. >> i will help redeem the president all right? he is on the wake of three weeks away from his earlier address at the inauguration okay? people saw that. and i think they feel he is going to be repeating that. and that is probably a big reason why they didn't tune in. therefore, he gets a pass. what do you think? >> also i think that's right. i think eleanor's right if you are watching it on white house.gov my wife watched it on her ipad. that doesn't show up in the neilsen ratings. a lot of people were watching it online or watching it the next day. tv consumption is changing. >> the oratory about they deserve a vote and going through all the gun victims, those are real people and they were sitting there. >>
in cairo. for the first time, european leaders have agreed to cut the eu budget. i took more than 24 hours of wall-to-wall negotiations to reach a deal -- it took more than 24 hours. there were major disagreements. one camp was determined to make major cuts, and another was set on keeping up the you put the public spending. austerity one out in the end -- austerity won out in the end. >> keeping his hands in pockets -- all part of the negotiation, but eventually, a deal. countries would contribute most to the budget fought hard to cut costs, arguing that this age of austerity demands nothing less. >> the british public can be proud we have cut the seven-year credit card limit for the european union for the first time ever. every previous time, the multi- year deals have been agreed, spending has gone up. not this time. >> this was always going to be a long stretch. no budget deal is ever easy. it took more than 24 hours of nearly nonstop haggling to produce results -- all too much for some. those who sought to protect certain areas of spending fought their corner hard, but the french presi
to the e.u. asking hezbollah to be designated a terrorist organization, being one of 22 to vote to designate the iranian revolutionary guard a terrorist organization, being one of two on two occasions to vote against sanctions that this body was trying to impose on iran, the statements you made about palestinians and about the jewish lobby, all that together. that the image you created is one of sending the worst possible signal to our enemies and friends at one of the most critical times in world history? >> no, i would not agree with that. because i have taken actions and made statements very clear as to what i believe hezbollah and hamas are as a terrorist organizations. >> if you had a chance tomorrow, today, after lunch, to vote to say that the iranian revolutionary guard was a terrorist organization. would you still vote no? >> the reason i voted no to start with... >> well i know why, you told me that. my question is would you reconsider and would you vote yes this time? or would you still vote no? >> times change. i recognize that and, yes, i would reconsider. >> well, t
's some talks coming up now in kazakhstan of all places in late february involving the eu, the united states and the iranians. and so this is going to be a venue in which people are going to be able to see to a certain extent how serious iran is about negotiating on limits on its nuclear program. there hasn't been negotiations for some significant period of time. and this is an opportunity to test the iranians. i think this initial round is not going to prove much but certainly over the next six months, i think there will be an ample opportunity to see if there is an intent on the iranian part to reach some sort of compromise. >> rose: leon panetta and others have said the following. we have no information that there's been a decision on the part of the iranian government and the most influential people there to builds a nuclear weapon and a missile that will deliver it. what do they mean when they say that? >> well, i can't really speak for them but i think it's pretty clear that iran has made the decision to have a nuclear weapons program. and there's really nothing el that explain
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)